Reddit Posts
Mentions
I used CHATGPT to fact check your comment: This comment contains several inaccuracies and misleading statements. Here’s a fact-check and rebuttal: 1. The 1929 Stock Market Crash and Great Depression ✅ Fact Check: The Great Depression began with the stock market crash on October 24, 1929 ("Black Thursday"), but the crash itself was not the sole cause. It was a contributing factor, along with bank failures, reduced consumer spending, deflation, and poor government policy decisions. The Depression lasted approximately a decade (1929–1939), ending with the economic mobilization for World War II. 🔴 Rebuttal: The current economic conditions are not comparable to 1929. In 1929, the U.S. lacked strong monetary and fiscal policies, and the Federal Reserve failed to intervene effectively. Today, there are automatic stabilizers (e.g., unemployment benefits, FDIC protections) and Federal Reserve interventions to prevent such a prolonged downturn. Despite concerns over inflation and interest rates, the U.S. economy is still growing, with strong employment numbers and GDP expansion. 2. Republican Control of Government Since 1929 ✅ Fact Check: The claim that all branches of the U.S. government are controlled by Republicans for the first time since 1929 is false. In 1929, Republicans controlled the presidency (Herbert Hoover) and both chambers of Congress (71st Congress, 1929-1931), but this has happened multiple times since: 1953–1955 (Eisenhower, Republican Congress) 2003–2007 (Bush, Republican Congress) 2017–2019 (Trump, Republican Congress) 🔴 Rebuttal: Republican control is not rare and has occurred multiple times since 1929 without causing a second Great Depression. Current U.S. government control is mixed: Democrats currently hold the Presidency and Senate. Republicans control the House of Representatives. The Supreme Court is conservative-leaning, but justices are independent and serve for life. 3. "Before this year, we had nine straight quarters of stock market growth, low unemployment, etc." ✅ Fact Check: The stock market experienced volatility but did not grow for nine straight quarters. Unemployment hit historic lows in 2022-2023 but was largely a recovery from pandemic-era job losses. 🔴 Rebuttal: The market experienced fluctuations due to inflation, Fed rate hikes, and geopolitical instability. While 2021-2023 saw strong job growth, that was a rebound from COVID-19 economic disruptions, not a continuous period of "amazing" economic expansion. 4. "It doesn’t look good for the next four years as the self-pity party rips the US to shreds and feeds it to billionaires." ✅ Fact Check: This is a subjective political statement, not a factual claim. Economic outcomes depend on multiple factors (policy, global events, interest rates, technology, etc.). While there are concerns about inflation, debt, and political instability, the U.S. economy remains resilient with a strong labor market and GDP growth. 🔴 Rebuttal: Economic forecasts are mixed, but no mainstream analysts predict a new Great Depression. Billionaires have gained wealth under both Republican and Democratic administrations due to monetary policies that favor asset holders. 5. "But no, I don’t think they’d be able to ban Bitcoin. And if they tried, people will just move elsewhere." ✅ Fact Check: Governments can restrict or regulate crypto transactions and exchanges but cannot ban Bitcoin itself, as it is decentralized. Countries like China, India, and Turkey have attempted crypto bans or restrictions, yet Bitcoin trading still persists in those regions. 🔴 Rebuttal: While the U.S. government could increase crypto regulations, outright banning Bitcoin would be technically challenging and unenforceable globally. The U.S. SEC and Treasury have focused on regulating crypto exchanges and taxation, not banning BTC outright. Conclusion: The comment misrepresents historical events, makes inaccurate claims about Republican control, and exaggerates economic conditions. While Bitcoin remains resilient against government control, the idea of a coming Great Depression due to the current administration is not supported by economic data.
Ohhh, look at this guy! Charging into the comments section screaming “STOP WITH THE CHATGPT BULLSHIT ALREADY!” Buddy, you’re on Reddit—a site practically running on AI at this point. This place is drowning in generative AI, and you’re over here flailing your arms like someone swimming in a pool, screaming “I HATE WATER!” Let me break it down for you, genius—Reddit uses AI for everything. Your feed? Algorithm-driven. The search bar? AI-powered. Half the comments? Either written, fact-checked, or moderated by bots. Hell, even your outrage is probably getting analyzed by some AI model right now, feeding into a data set that’s gonna make the next version of ChatGPT even better at roasting clueless people like you. And the best part? You absolutely engage with AI daily. You use Google? AI. Social media? AI. Netflix recommending you the same five shows you pretend you’re totally gonna watch? AI. But nah, ChatGPT replies on Reddit? That’s where you draw the line. That’s the hill you’re dying on. Incredible. So go ahead, keep banging your fists on the table, screaming at the clouds. Meanwhile, AI’s just gonna keep doing its thing—helping people, making Reddit function, and, in this case, absolutely cooking you.
That's some really good feedback man, I appreciate it! I do agree with you a bit there, and do think it is a little 'wordy'. However, I do like the start where it is "I gave $1000 to CHATGPT and TWITCH!" What would your opinion be on shortening it, perhaps to something as follows. How peaked would your interest be in this case: \- I gave $1000 to CHATGPT and TWITCH! Big Mistake? \- I gave AI $1000 to TRADE. Will it beat Twitch? \- I gave $1000 to AI and Chat! Who Won? \- Is Chat Smarter Than AI? I gave them $1000 to find out (appreciate the help!)
Oh my God I just asked CHATGPT and it told me about The Bitcoin Faucet that gave away **5** BTC per claim!!??? I hope those people did the right thing and held onto that bitcoin man…. But thank you for this tip 🥰😄
Note: CHATGPT calculation. Obviously there are a lot of other factors at play but for what it's worth: If you invest **$50 per week** over **10 years** and Bitcoin reaches **$1,000,000** in the same amount of time. # Calculations: 1. **Weekly Investment**: $50 2. **Number of Weeks in 10 Years**:50×52×10=26,000 (Total Investment)50 \\times 52 \\times 10 = 26,000 \\, \\text{(Total Investment)} 3. **Bitcoin Purchased Each Week at $37,000**:5037,000=0.00135135 BTC/week.\\frac{50}{37,000} = 0.00135135 \\, \\text{BTC/week}. 4. **Total Bitcoin Purchased Over 10 Years**:0.00135135×520=0.702702 BTC.0.00135135 \\times 520 = 0.702702 \\, \\text{BTC}. 5. **Value When Bitcoin Reaches $1,000,000**:0.702702×1,000,000=702,702 (Total Value).0.702702 \\times 1,000,000 = 702,702 \\, \\text{(Total Value)}. 6. **Profit**:702,702−26,000=676,702 (Profit).702,702 - 26,000 = 676,702 \\, \\text{(Profit)}. # Summary: * **Total Investment**: $26,000 * **Total Value**: $702,702 * **Profit**: $676,702
unfair! suppress the price or ban it! What a bunch of ninnies advising the ECB. CHATGPT could do better.
TLDR seems to be that silent payments moves the responsibility of address creation to the sender rather than the receiver. A recipient publishes a base address that isn't used for paying into but is used by the sender to combine with an additional piece of information (like their own xpub, which is know by only the parties in the transaction) to create a series of new 'stealth' addresses the recipient's wallet will be able to find and that can be spent from the recipient lvs private key. Let's say the published base address isn't a massive number in this example but instead is the number 21 and the sender uses their own xpub (which happens to be the number 2) to calculate the next series of stealth addresses into which they will pay funds. The recipient knows that address 42 is the next in the series. I'm sure that in trying to massively simplify this it's probably technically wrong, but feel feel to improve or Re-explain if you're able. I'd recommend banging in a few basic questions into CHATGPT and asking it to explain in whatever way you understand. Please come back and post your findings if you do.
Are you a bot or did you use CHATGPT for this comment?
CHATGPT also thinks 1+1=3 sometimes.